I mean, you’re the one that seeks out my posts all over the forum so who really is the doofy one? I remember when I needed that spice in my life too. You’ll get there, one day.You're doofy as fuck bro.
My stock portfolio always thanks me.
I mean, you’re the one that seeks out my posts all over the forum so who really is the doofy one? I remember when I needed that spice in my life too. You’ll get there, one day.
Core frequency: the xbox one went through this 4 or 5 months before launch, so it's definitely possible, however it must cost a lot of money to re-validate all these machines (some will fail, it takes time, etc.)It might be obvious to many, but I’ve seen several posts on GAF where users acted like Sony could just increase the CUs or increase the CPU frequency at the drop of a hat.
Die no but, as history already shown, Cerny and Kaz can walk into a room and get at least 8gb of ram...
just saying
I'll take that bet. What's the wager?I'm willing to bet the difference is smaller than the PS4 and Xbox One
I totally don't believe that they added the second VDP late considering how each VDP is dedicated to very specific graphic tasks.
I was joking when saying "two weeks" by the way.
I want in on thisI'll take that bet. What's the wager?
Core frequency: the xbox one went through this 4 or 5 months before launch, so it's definitely possible, however it must cost a lot of money to re-validate all these machines (some will fail, it takes time, etc.)
Adding CUs:
I'm not in this situation, but as Penello pointed out, there are two scenarios, enable the redundancy CUs that are already on the DIE for redundancy (many will be defective, this again means that all previously built consoles will have to be re-validated, and this is much more likely that many will fail, to compensate they could consider down-clocking so that more parts pass QA)... my bet is that system architects know exactly how many are likely to pass/fail that effort if they decide to go down that road.
If you go above the 40CUs (assuming a 36CU chip that has 4 CUs for redundancy), new SOC chips would need to be planned and made, a new board layout and cooling solution could be needed as well (or a higher tolerance to high pitch noise on the part of your customers), and all the consoles that are already manufactured would all need to be scrapped, new dev kits could be needed as well. There would be a delay of at least a couple of months.
None of the options are easy, but they are all possible, it just depends how much that extra power is worth in therms of units sold once the product is out, if you think it will make any difference at all to your target audience (Nintendo would argue that it doesn't always make any difference at all).
When I say late I mean almost a year before launch. The Saturn wiki cites Next Gen on that- not sure how reliable that is but it matches up pretty closely with the story I’ve always heard about SEGA designing the Saturn and how reacting to Sony by throwing in extra hardware that it wasn’t necessarily built around made it a difficult system to properly utilize at the time. But hey maybe that’s not correct
Cool you and the other guy have to change your avatars to pictures of Ghost of Tsushima's official box art for 1 month if I'm right and if you're right I'll let you choose mineI'll take that bet. What's the wager?
Designing a new SOC and scrapping all the work you did while delaying the system goes far beyond the bounds of possible IMO. It's just not an option. The fact is it doesn't make any difference. Even if the Xbox One was totally redesigned to be equivalent to PS4, and came out six months later, it still would have gotten its ass kicked, probably in much the same way, at the cost of untold millions.
Even if the PS5 and Xbox leaked specs are right on, the system is in a much better place than the Xbox One was.
It really depends what "late" means. It could mean, "late in the development", as opposed to the system being revamped when it was being sent out to devs and manufacturing was spinning up, which is what "late" would mean in the context we are talking about now.
If we're speaking on percentages as in the start of this generation with base Xbox One and Ps4, then we have to change things a bit. The percentage in power between Ps4 and Xbox One were miniscule in comparison to, say, the One X and the PS4 Pro and where 45% more power (using 45% as an example - not the actual power metric) was actually quite substantial in the name of actual teraflops in respect to both machines.Cool you and the other guy have to change your avatars to pictures of Ghost of Tsushima's official box art for 1 month if I'm right and if you're right I'll let you choose mine
PS4 had a 50% GPU advantage but we can lower it to 45%
If PS5 is 45% less powerful than the Series X then you win
I want in on this
Ok so 1.84 vs 1.31 was a 40% compute advantage PS4 vs Xbox OneCool you and the other guy have to change your avatars to pictures of Ghost of Tsushima's official box art for 1 month if I'm right and if you're right I'll let you choose mine
PS4 had a 50% GPU advantage but we can lower it to 45%
If PS5 is 45% less powerful than the Series X then you win
This is what I mean. There's a huge difference between 1.84 vs 1.31 and 6TF vs 4Tf or 12tf vs 9tf.Ok so 1.84 vs 1.31 was a 40% compute advantage PS4 vs Xbox One
If Series X has less than a 40% compute advantage (teraflops) then I win
We have to use the difference of the overall boxes, the TFLOPs that's the best metric to use as it eliminates our opinions of 900P vs 1080P, 4K CB vs 4K native, etcThis is what I mean. There's a huge difference between 1.84 vs 1.31 and 6TF vs 4Tf or 12tf vs 9tf.
1.84 vs 1.31 was small and only displayed in resolution ie 900p vs 1080p etc. Not a big deal in my opinion.
Where as the differences between the One X and the Ps4 Pro was much more pronounced as 6tf > 4tf and the X typically had the graphical/performance advantage. The percentage in power doesnt tell the whole story as 2 whole teraflops is a pretty substantial metric, regardless of how small the percentage number. It just doesnt tell the whole story.
Ok so 1.84 vs 1.31 was a 40% compute advantage PS4 vs Xbox One
If Series X has less than a 40% compute advantage (teraflops) then I win
Fixed that for you.Most likely TimDog.
Penello basically doubling down on PS5 being weak sauce.
For devs to test BC support, it may be enhanced, of their titles?And why, just why would you test BC modes on a pure devkit APU? Because devs want to play BC games?
How strange, some smart people have been repeating that Sega added the second CPU to the Saturn two weeks before release. Did they lie ?
Cool you and the other guy have to change your avatars to pictures of Ghost of Tsushima's official box art for 1 month if I'm right and if you're right I'll let you choose mine
PS4 had a 50% GPU advantage but we can lower it to 45%
If PS5 is 45% less powerful than the Series X then you win
For devs to test BC support, it may be enhanced, of their titles?
The whole idea of Sony's BC solution is that you don't have to test it, because it just works in hardware by pretending to be a PS4/PS4 Pro. If you want enhancements you would not need BC modes in a devkit.
It wasn't much compared to the advantages the PS4 had with its GPU and unified ramXbox one had a better CPU. The Xbox One's processor has a faster clock speed of 1.7-GHz, compared to the PS4's 1.6-GHz CPU.
Yeah, true.Sony can use the cloud too.
Yeah, true.
But they're paying Microsoft for access. Lol.
Yeah, true.
But they're paying Microsoft for access. Lol.
Microsoft has the infrastructure. Sony doesnt. If they didnt, this wouldn't have happened:Microsoft owns the cloud? Do they own the entire Internet?
Sony has been using AWS and their own cloud infrastructure for over a decade. Even NASA's OpenStack.
Hurr, durr, they pay MSFT. And MS pays Sony for a lot of software and tech as well. These businesses are not the fanatics forum dwellers are.